Is there any evidence for this other than opinion pieces?
Asking sincerely.
I see arguments for both sides being the source of most innovation, but haven't seen real, valid, data-driven evidence. Granted, I haven't looked much. I have my own opinion, but want more evidence, for both arguments.
This is just logical consequence, from erroneous foundations, to be strict, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statism
Idea, that when somebody become authoritative with power, Statists think, such people should automatically gather wisdom and Universe knowledge, to make much better decisions, than free market.
Unfortunately, in reality, authoritative with power, usually use their power for some silly things, not for people good, and usually, power are not effective. But sometimes, in very special conditions, have so obvious things to do (and these things just impossible to do on free market, like Manhattan project, or trans-American railroad), that even with very bad efficiency, just huge resources investments are enough to make huge leap.
For example, now we don't know "Manhattan project" way to achieve GAI, so even if somebody will decide to throw government resources we will not achieve GAI, will just convert resources to waste. And such things happen lot of time before, but Statists prefer to ignore such examples, they show only good examples to convince people.
But authoritarian power decision efficiency, from experience of late Soviet Union, was about 5-30% (so 70-95% wasted, or from 2/3 to near all invested).